Hi, Have you missed this thread? If the problem requires more time to investigate, could you consider to revert ata change for a while? Thank you. Alexander Nasonov writes: > David Brownlee wrote: >> Just another data point - seeing this same panic on a T480 with the >> latest kernel from nyftp > > Same problem on T470. > > -- > Alex -- Ryo ONODERA // r...@tetera.org PGP fingerprint = 82A2 DC91 76E0 A10A 8ABB FD1B F404 27FA C7D1 15F3
Plus to confirm reverting just this commit from today's github copy of current (d5b32e03eac8b05d38a143ee0ec615efb2233201) boots fine on the T480 Thanks On Thu, 30 Apr 2020 at 00:12, Alexander Nasonov wrote: > > David Brownlee wrote: > > Just another data point - seeing this same panic on a T480 with the > > latest kernel from nyftp > > Same problem on T470. > > -- > Alex
We can setup an equivalence: put as much effort into the SCTP removal proposal as there was for the SCTP introduction proposal. Since SCTP was just dropped in src without any prior discussion, I don't think we need any discussion for removing it.
At Fri, 01 May 2020 15:41:14 +1000, matthew green wrote: > > > .. I mean, if it's a "tuneable" value like this rather than a constant > > > like > > > __HAVE_SLOW_COMPUTER. :-) > > > > I see. I like this feeling. (not strong opinion too though) > > How about you, mrg@? > > works for me. i like Andrew's argument fo param.h for values > and types.h for yes/no. I've commited it. Thank you! --- Tetsuya Isaki